Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-07-23
SATURDAY, JULY 23, 1887.
The Tax Assessment.

we have gwen carelully coihPiiou
items from the list of the county tax
assessment for the present year, show
ing the radical action of the present
Assessor, and the Irregularities, inac-
c,,racies and lack of care on the part
Of him and his deputies. There isone
phase of this matter which calls for
more than passing notice. 1t is an
aspect of the affair far reaching in its
effects and most unfairly burdensome
to the taxpayers of the county. This
is the tremendous aggregate raise
made in the valuation of the county
property. Attention was called to this
aspect of the assessment in our col
umns many months ago, when the
animus of the Assessor was first de-
veloped. The estimate then made,
that the county would be obliged to
pay more than quarter OF
million more State tax than her
Just share, is now a matter OF
fact and not OF conjecture. The
total valuation of the County is raised
to over $50 O,OOO, 900, and at the rate
made by the State last year, we shall
pay more than half million dollars
into the State treasury. The excess
is hardship, heavy burden to be
laid, as it is for the most part, on the
shoulders OF small property holders.
Now, to show how very unfairly this
will act on our interests, let us take
tn e County of Alameda. 1t is in all,
excepting territorial area, a pretty
close parallel to our own case. 1t con-
tains the city Of Oakland, claiming
about the same population as Los
Angeles, the town of Alameda OF
nearly the same size as Pasadena,
and then multitude of towns,
generally rather larger in pop
ulation, and more in number
than those of our own county. Last
year the assessment of Alameda
county was $55, 1926, ,232, an increase
over that of the preceding year of
$1,373, ,626. Los Angeles county was
valued at $37 $50 $50, an increase of
A,747 1897. This was probably as fair
n comparative assessment as could
have been made. The Oakland streets
are generally paved and severed. The
general average of its buildings
are Of much greater value than those
Of Los Angeles. The latter county is
much younger in its development
than Alameda. And a natural conse-
quence is that the improvements
here are far less valuable than
are the. costly residences of
San Francisco merchants who
sleep in Oakland and Alameda. This
year the figures of the Alameda county
Assessor are not before us, but the
raise over that of year ago is COM
paratively insignificant. If it be said
that our outside lands are OF much
greater value than those in Alameda,
it may be answered, in the first place,
that Mr.. Mason has made horizontal
raise, which takes in the town proper
fy with that of the country, and that
the statement here supposed to be
made is not true. At Haywards and
other select parts of the bay county
lands are generally held as high
as ours are. Still, had the AS
SCISSOR gone so far us to put
ms on a par with Alameda
county and raised us $40, 900 900 there
would have been no general complaint
made. Our valuation would have
been raised over fifty per cent, as
against the other county's five, but
we should have been content. Ger
tainly there is no just reason for max
ing US pay twice as much State tax as
Alameda does. This is especially rec
commended to Mr.. III. V. Moorehouse,
of the State Board of Equalization, in
tlie hope that he will equalize this
m after by raising his own county
30 mething like fifty. per cent over the
pr esent figures. The trouble goes
much deeper than appears at first
sight, in that this raise, so
injudiciously made, can hardly ever
be rectified. Should future Assessor
xeek to adjust the matter, the State
Board will call for the proofs that Los
Angeles County has had a setback, to
prove which would do us more injury
.than the paying ofexcessive taxes would
come to. Here is the dilemma we are
tortured on for all time to come.